It was previously rejected because free newspapers are associated with a lack of journalistic quality and the Standard's previous owners, Associated Newspapers, were concerned that giving the paper away would somehow affect its cachet.

Instead, the company created London Lite, a free version of the Standard that offered news and entertainment without the analysis, opinion, commentary and many other sought-after features of the paid-for issue.

Some saw Associated's innovation as a protective measure to guard the Standard's London monopoly. Others, especially the Standard's journalists, thought it as an unnecessary launch that jeopardised their paper.

Most significantly, it was viewed at Rupert Murdoch's Wapping outfit, News International, as a sign of weakness, prompting it to launch its own free, thelondonpaper.

Suddenly, Associated was required to defend its patch as never before, bumping up the print run of its London Lite. The net result was the destabilisation of the Standard and, in January this year, the selling of a 75.1% stake to Alexander Lebedev.

However, the Standard and Lite remained yoked together, with the former providing editorial for the latter with both operating from the same newsroom.

Then, in August, came Murdoch's announcement that he was retreating from the scene by closing thelondonpaper in mid-September. Associated had secured a notable and rare victory against the world's leading newspaper mogul.

Now Lebedev has decided to fill the vacuum by taking the Standard free, deciding that he can make a success of matching quality and quantity, boosting distribution to 600,000 a day in the hope that advertisers will recognise the value of an enlarged audience for an upscale paper.

He and his editor, Geordie Greig, are convinced that they can make a virtue of being the first "quality free".

Theirs is certainly a bold move, and not without risks. Will the widespread giveaway model dilute the Standard's current core readership, which is affluent, arty, youngish and middle class? If so, will it give advertisers pause for thought about continuing to buy space?

It is fair to point out that Associated's morning free, Metro, has discovered an affluent readership and benefited from advertising revenue as a result. So the Standard may well lock into a similar audience.

One other point to take into account, as Steve Busfield pointed out, is the parlous state of the advertising market. Is ad revenue really about to bounce back?

The key to possible success lies in how people who are handed coies of the paper perceive it. I have watched many commuters turns their backs on thelondonpaper and London Lite. They was nothing much to choose between the two in terms of content.

Now, unless Associated dramatically closes the Lite, people will have a proper choice, between a Standard that publishes journalism of quality, and a Lite that skims the surface of the daily news agenda and concentrates on lighter material.

It will be fascinating to see how people react to being given a "real" paper for nothing.

I know the journalists on the Standard are split. Some are genuinely excited, believing it's a natural step. Some believe it will devalue their work and represents a journalistic nadir.

There is no earthly reason, however, why a quality free daily should not work. I seem to recall once urging The Independent to take that step.

Whatever the case, it's another sign of the revolutionary times in newspapers. It's no good crying about it. If we want to get good journalism to people we have to innovate.

[Declaration of interest: I write a weekly media column for the Standard]